roller coaster 70

Matt Vinyl · Post by **Matt Vinyl** » Fri Jun 04, 2010 11:40 am

Ha-ha!! I didn't think there would be, but I remember some older machines that had the Jackpot and then the top feature, but the top would often give less than the JP. So you'd gamble the JP for 'something potentially better' but end off worse off... Cosmic Casino used to be guilty of that...

ChrisBrighton · Post by **ChrisBrighton** » Fri Jun 04, 2010 12:10 pm

I did'nt know there was a minimum for this.

I take it all back.

Captain.Tattybojangles · Fri Jun 04, 2010 12:26 pm

Matt Vinyl wrote:Ha-ha!! I didn't think there would be, but I remember some older machines that had the Jackpot and then the top feature, but the top would often give less than the JP. So you'd gamble the JP for 'something potentially better' but end off worse off... Cosmic Casino used to be guilty of that...

Excusen me if I'm not talking correct, but was the prize worse than the Jackpot because the Jackpot was tokens, and the worse top would be perhaps £4 but all cash? They'd have a £3 cash JP then a £6 token JP and then the top.

superfruiter · Post by **superfruiter** » Fri Jun 04, 2010 12:37 pm

PMK wrote:You've turned it into a disgrace, only ever played it once and will never play it again. The board looks the same granted, but you should remember that on the old roller coaster the top DID give the jackpot amount and the chance of more to follow. On max stake this eats money continuously with little chance of any realistic return.

Its only a matter of time(or is it?) before any of the games on the terminal are 'hacked' and I for one will be chortling. You rip people off you will pay the price.

Stick to what you do best, making games where the most the average player is likely to win is the their stake money back.

so are you suggesting that the top of the cash ladder should have been £70? surely if that were the case then the game would be even worse to play cos it wouldn't let you anyway near the top unless you'd thrown £100 over the back of it. At least if what dr paragon is saying is correct, then you can reach the top in a less than bank breaking amount of money.

I've played DOND's that have taken £80 and more just to phone board. I haven't seen you moaning about those on here... is that cos BFG don't give a shit? At least someone from games whorehouse has been open enough to come on here and talk about what they've done - even if we don't agree with it.... seems we can all do better games than any manufacturer

griff50 · Post by **griff50** » Fri Jun 04, 2010 12:44 pm

I think this is a good example of how machines gameplay and programming has had to change due to changes in jackpot size. Imagine a psycho cash beast on 70, or even an old project seventh heaven? even at £1 a play it would play nothing like the old days

Captain.Tattybojangles · Fri Jun 04, 2010 1:27 pm

Think another issue is, no one gets pissed off with DOND here too much, OK we do...but it's not a Rollercoaster sized ball of unappreciation. But DOND was DOND, same blocks and coding really machine after machine.
Meanwhile, we loved the old Rollercoaster, with all its quirks and that, so we are just having a comedown after playing the newer £70 one.
So in short, we know what DOND's going to be like so we don't complain
But we knew what Rollercoaster used to be like, so we complain that it's not the same standard.

PMK · Post by **PMK** » Fri Jun 04, 2010 2:22 pm

superfruiter wrote:
PMK wrote:You've turned it into a disgrace, only ever played it once and will never play it again. The board looks the same granted, but you should remember that on the old roller coaster the top DID give the jackpot amount and the chance of more to follow. On max stake this eats money continuously with little chance of any realistic return.

Its only a matter of time(or is it?) before any of the games on the terminal are 'hacked' and I for one will be chortling. You rip people off you will pay the price.

Stick to what you do best, making games where the most the average player is likely to win is the their stake money back.
so are you suggesting that the top of the cash ladder should have been £70? surely if that were the case then the game would be even worse to play cos it wouldn't let you anyway near the top unless you'd thrown £100 over the back of it. At least if what dr paragon is saying is correct, then you can reach the top in a less than bank breaking amount of money.

I've played DOND's that have taken £80 and more just to phone board. I haven't seen you moaning about those on here... is that cos BFG don't give a shit? At least someone from games whorehouse has been open enough to come on here and talk about what they've done - even if we don't agree with it.... seems we can all do better games than any manufacturer

But you CAN throw hundred(S) down the back of this one and end up with a thirty quid top LOSE the gamble and have the machine think its paid out the thirty!!! Thats according to what Dr Paragon stated in another post. Can barely think of any recent(ish) machines where the Mega Streak/Top Feature pays LESS than the jackpot??

In fact can anyone name one top feature on a £70 jackpot machine that pays less than £70?? Big Money on Pokerface/clones isn't the top feature by the way!!

If I decide I wanna chase out a top on dond at least I know I'm GUARANTEED a £70 MS when it finally comes around regardless of what it costs. Unlike on the disgraceful games on the infiniti thingies!!

If you read some of the other posts regarding other games on these things, you'll see they are all disgusting money eaters, many worse than the attorcious roller coaster.

Also I think you'll find a few people have moaned about donds in the past!!!!

gambogaz1 · Post by **gambogaz1** » Fri Jun 04, 2010 2:42 pm

superfruiter wrote:
PMK wrote:You've turned it into a disgrace, only ever played it once and will never play it again. The board looks the same granted, but you should remember that on the old roller coaster the top DID give the jackpot amount and the chance of more to follow. On max stake this eats money continuously with little chance of any realistic return.

Its only a matter of time(or is it?) before any of the games on the terminal are 'hacked' and I for one will be chortling. You rip people off you will pay the price.

Stick to what you do best, making games where the most the average player is likely to win is the their stake money back.
so are you suggesting that the top of the cash ladder should have been £70? surely if that were the case then the game would be even worse to play cos it wouldn't let you anyway near the top unless you'd thrown £100 over the back of it. At least if what dr paragon is saying is correct, then you can reach the top in a less than bank breaking amount of money.

I've played DOND's that have taken £80 and more just to phone board. I haven't seen you moaning about those on here... is that cos BFG don't give a shit? At least someone from games whorehouse has been open enough to come on here and talk about what they've done - even if we don't agree with it.... seems we can all do better games than any manufacturer

To put into comparison what Paragon have done Imagine :

DOND Red Alert £70 JP advertised

Only the cash stack stops at £20
It has Streak & Super streak but no Mega streak cups
All the features are non Pot features

Then there's the phone game that does have the possibility of £70

That is basically what Paragon are offering.

Oh I nearly forgot the gamble, erm

ah yes, imagine your DOND red alert, then stood next to it is a bell fruit employee, you've just got £30 off the phone game that the machine had automatically collected for you to take, you hand that over to the bellfruit employee and have a quick game of cards, if you win bonus, if you lose your stood there £100 over the back and the machine now set back by a £30 win that you don't actually have.

Yeah real fair game that is.

Matt Vinyl · Post by **Matt Vinyl** » Fri Jun 04, 2010 11:47 pm

At least if what dr paragon is saying is correct, then you can reach the top in a less than bank breaking amount of money.

^ This.

Tatty: No mate, the JP was all cash £15, but the top feature would quite often only give you a lower amount than this.

thecannonball89 · Post by **thecannonball89** » Fri Jun 04, 2010 11:52 pm

Dr Paragon wrote:This debate has been had before. The "top" on RollerCoaster is a minimum of £25 and a maximum of £70 (per credit). If £70 is there to be had, then it will award it. If not, its random. This was always a difficult choice between continuously blocking the end, or allowing it through and not paying a jackpot.

Invincible and a number of other Red Gaming machines did exactly the same. In face, you could get £10 from the end. Its the most popular game on the terminal, so in that respect we got it right. From a purists point of view, perhaps we got it wrong... it's still spoken about at GW's AWP office now...

Yes but nealry evry other red gaming does atleast a jp from the top feature.

griff50 · Post by **griff50** » Sat Jun 05, 2010 12:16 am

i think at least players should be warned about this on the machine that the top feature may not pay 70. That would be fair at least.

tommya · Post by **tommya** » Sat Jun 05, 2010 1:47 am

griff 50 there is a 70 pound physco cash beast it s called physco cash beast 2 the beast is back and they play ok, u can even go higher and lower on things what u could not on the original game all the features still there and u can get the pot of real magic still.

Spyder · Post by **Spyder** » Sat Jun 05, 2010 9:55 am

re: reds giving less than jackpot tops

a few things used to happen with these..

it'd give a £10 top, then the next top would go big...

you'd get 2 or 3 jackpots THEN get another "top" WHICH SOMETIMES DIDNT EVEN GIVE YOU A WIN... it was just a trapped in win that the computer then decided to give less than the jackpot due to the %age..

these GW units sound like they are total shite.. you shouldnt be hoping the machine is gonna give you AT LEAST £70.. you should be waiting for that credit break after the £70... £70 jackpot should mean £70 tops.. every time, comparing it to reds and saying "well they did it so its ok" it a bit half-hearted...

Spyder · Post by **Spyder** » Sat Jun 05, 2010 10:00 am

griff50 wrote:I think this is a good example of how machines gameplay and programming has had to change due to changes in jackpot size. Imagine a psycho cash beast on 70, or even an old project seventh heaven? even at £1 a play it would play nothing like the old days

theres a cash beast on £75... differnet program though as its the club version

the ratio of stake jackpot is similar.. so if you jsut changed the ratio of all of the prizes on the £15 jackpot versions, they would play the same, but just on a higher stake... mathematicly it would be similar, but psycologicly you'd not take the same risks due to the amount of money being more..

bowie · Post by **bowie** » Sat Jun 05, 2010 12:01 pm

Why would i want to reach the top if it wasn't at least pot? That's the reason i put so much down the back in the first place, in the hope it costs less than 70 in the first place and it goes past, i don't play machines for a mid level feature (well not all), i play for the end feature in the hope it does a wee bit more than what i've put in, it's the nature of the game we play, what GW are doing is giving us the great feeling of reaching the end of the trail but giving us no reward, i don't play them there shit, even Gold Strike is unhittable, well for me it is.